Forums: Purgatory:

Graph images are unreadable.

The large one is very nice and quite readable.

We could add a legend, and text below it.

The text of the graphs on the web page is harder to read.

DanSpillane: I received your message.

I was referring to the appearance of the graph on the web page, as you noted above. Not the readability of the graph itself. If you view the image (right click, view image in Firefox or view the image directly in IE) then it looks fine.

Any improvements, let either of us know. We both enjoyed working on this. Truly a unique opportunity.

I love the big graph.

I am also hoping other people can find business moves of Cheney associates on or before September 10th. Then we can put them on the red line on the right, where now five events are listed.

Remarkably, then, it�s fair to conclude certain stock market investors knew a crisis was going to happen--the day before. In effect, the VIX, while normally independent of Halliburton stock, suddenly moved in lockstep with Halliburton.

Next, in line with the spike in the VIX, yet another indicator foretold September 11th. The put/call stock options ratio--a measure of sophisticated investors betting on a market fall--peaked twice, to a level over one. First, the ratio peaked for the very options transition period immediately after the White House memo, and before September 11th (which crested on August 17th) and next, it peaked on September 10th, the day before the strike. Once again, the put/call ratio moves correspond with Halliburton steps and the August 6th and September 10th dates.

interesting theory but i think it's a quantum leap to suggest that broad based indicators reflected some sort of general knowledge in the markets that the events of sept 11th were about to happen.

Originally posted by doran
interesting theory but i think it's a quantum leap to suggest that broad based indicators reflected some sort of general knowledge in the markets that the events of sept 11th were about to happen.

well the proff is there if anybody really wants to know for instance...

..the firm used to place the "put options" on United Airlines stock was, until 1998, managed by the man who is now in the number three Executive Director position at the Central Intelligence Agency. Until 1997 A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard had been Chairman of the investment bank A.B. Brown. A.B. Brown was acquired by Banker's Trust in 1997. Krongard then became, as part of the merger, Vice Chairman of Banker's Trust-AB Brown, one of 20 major U.S. banks named by Senator Carl Levin this year as being connected to money laundering. Krongard's last position at Banker's Trust (BT) was to oversee "private client relations." In this capacity he had direct hands-on relations with some of the wealthiest people in the world in a kind of specialized banking operation that has been identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as being closely connected to the laundering of drug money.

Krongard (re?) joined the CIA in 1998 as counsel to CIA Director George Tenet. He was promoted to CIA Executive Director by President Bush in March of this year. BT was acquired by Deutsche Bank in 1999. The combined firm is the single largest bank in Europe. Between September 6 and 7, the Chicago Board Options Exchange saw purchases of 4,744 put options on United Airlines, but only 396 call options. Assuming that 4,000 of the options were bought by people with advance knowledge of the imminent attacks, these "insiders" would have profited by almost $5 million.




-_______ On September 10, 4,516 put options on American Airlines were bought on the Chicago exchange, compared to only 748 calls. Again, there was no news at that point to justify this imbalance; Again, assuming that 4,000 of these options trades represent "insiders," they would represent a gain of about $4 million.




-_______ [The levels of put options purchased above were more than six times higher than normal.]




-_______ No similar trading in other airlines occurred on the Chicago exchange in the days immediately preceding Black Tuesday.




-_______ Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., which occupied 22 floors of the World Trade Center, saw 2,157 of its October $45 put options bought in the three trading days before Black Tuesday; this compares to an average of 27 contracts per day before September 6. Morgan Stanley's share price fell from $48.90 to $42.50 in the aftermath of the attacks. Assuming that 2,000 of these options contracts were bought based upon knowledge of the approaching attacks, their purchasers could have profited by at least $1.2 million.




-_______ Merrill Lynch & Co., with headquarters near the Twin Towers, saw 12,215 October $45 put options bought in the four trading days before the attacks; the previous average volume in those shares had been 252 contracts per day [a 1200% increase!]. When trading resumed, Merrill's shares fell from $46.88 to $41.50; assuming that 11,000 option contracts were bought by "insiders," their profit would have been about $5.5 million.




-_______ European regulators are examining trades in Germany's Munich Re, Switzerland's Swiss Re, and AXA of France, all major reinsurers with exposure to the Black Tuesday disaster. [FTW Note: AXA also owns more than 25% of American Airlines stock making the attacks a "double whammy" for them.]




On September 29, 2001 - in a vital story that has gone unnoticed by the major media - the San Francisco Chronicle reported, "Investors have yet to collect more than $2.5 million in profits they made trading options in the stock of United Airlines before the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks, according to a source familiar with the trades and market data.




"The uncollected money raises suspicions that the investors - whose identities and nationalities have not been made public - had advance knowledge of the strikes." They don't dare show up now. The suspension of trading for four days after the attacks made it impossible to cash-out quickly and claim the prize before investigators started looking.




"October series options for UAL Corp. were purchased in highly unusual volumes three trading days before the terrorist attacks for a total outlay of $2,070; investors bought the option contracts, each representing 100 shares, for 90 cents each. [This represents 230,000 shares]. Those options are now selling at more than $12 each. There are still 2,313 so-called "put" options outstanding [valued at $2.77 million and representing 231,300 shares] according to the Options Clearinghouse Corp."




"The source familiar with the United trades identified Deutsche Bank Alex Brown, the American investment banking arm of German giant Deutsche Bank, as the investment bank used to purchase at least some of these options." This was the operation managed by Krongard until as recently as 1998.

okay, so who says that it wasn't the terrorists themselves making a a play in the market instead of evil corporate insiders? surely they wouldn't waste such a great opportunity to profit from their work.

Originally posted by doran
okay, so who says that it wasn't the terrorists themselves making a a play in the market instead of evil corporate insiders? surely they wouldn't waste such a great opportunity to profit from their work.

it was the terrists! bush the real terrist!

you're not helping my case.

Aside from the airline puts, they bought puts betting the stock indexes would plummet.

And they bought MORE puts on August 17th--after the August 6th White House memo--which isn't being talked abou (put/call 1.07 17th vs 1.01 Sep 10th).

THAT is among the big new discoveries I made.

Never in the news that people were betting on a market crash after the White House memo!

Explain why Halliburton got its first and only WMD contract on September 10th, 2001.

i think it's obvious isn't it??

He told the September 11th cmte that the memo was "historical in nature"

IF the memo was historical in nature, then why did the WMD contract go out to Halliburton on Sept. 10th?

See my point...

Originally posted by DanSpillane
He told the September 11th cmte that the memo was "historical in nature"

IF the memo was historical in nature, then why did the WMD contract go out to Halliburton on Sept. 10th?

See my point...

i see your insinuation but the infamous "WMD contract" of sept. 10 was for securing russian wmd. not iraqi...

and how stupid would it be to do something like that the day before a huge attack that i guess you are insinuating they knew was going to happen?

but hey, it's a purty graph

Dude c'mon i mean if you just don't want to believe that this is how things work fine...the "terrorists did it all" those bad bad terrorists did it.They were able to everything from fly airplanes to buy puts from the inside on the US stock exchange.
But if you want to look at the truth about what went down with who ,and where,
try reading some of this shit.
The question isn't are there greedy dishonest people running the government, the question is who are they these days and what is their aggenda.

ask yourself one question

who benefitted the most or even at all from 9/11,both in political terms and $$

it certainly wasn't a hand full of 'terrorists'....besides any good terrorists knows that after an attack you are supposed to CLAIM responsibility not DENY it.

Originally posted by adamordna
Dude c'mon i mean if you just don't want to believe that this is how things work fine...the "terrorists did it all" those bad bad terrorists did it.They were able to everything from fly airplanes to buy puts from the inside on the US stock exchange.
But if you want to look at the truth about what went down with who ,and where,
try reading some of this shit.
The question isn't are there greedy dishonest people running the government, the question is who are they these days and what is their aggenda.

ask yourself one question

who benefitted the most or even at all from 9/11,both in political terms and $$

it certainly wasn't a hand full of 'terrorists'....besides any good terrorists knows that after an attack you are supposed to CLAIM responsibility not DENY it.

a suicide bomber doesn't make much out of blowing himself up either but that doesn't seem to stop them.

Originally posted by DanSpillane
Aside from the airline puts, they bought puts betting the stock indexes would plummet.

And they bought MORE puts on August 17th--after the August 6th White House memo--which isn't being talked abou (put/call 1.07 17th vs 1.01 Sep 10th).

THAT is among the big new discoveries I made.

Never in the news that people were betting on a market crash after the White House memo!

i'm not saying that some people might have had a good idea that something was going to happen (and possibly profit from it) but i find it difficult to buy that the put/call ratio or the vix would have been able to reflect that. that would have to be some gigantic leak.

as for the sept. 10th contract, i don't really see how the date is that important other than the fact that issuing it on the 10th would seem kind of stupid.

look, i don't have any love for bush (or halliburton for that matter) but i do think that saying "the market" knew that sept. 11th was going to happen is a bit silly.